Wednesday, February 17, 2016

monthly newspaper column

This thin bit of gruel ran today in the local newspaper under the headline "Crystal Ball Follies Across America."

It is not entirely clear
to me why Madame Zuzu’s fortune-telling parlor should excite more legal
and personal animosity than a political system that positively
encourages its practitioners to pretend they can see into the future.

Wouldn’t it be more
even-handed if politicians, like the fortune-tellers of Pennsylvania,
were legally required to advertise their endeavors as being “for
entertainment purposes only” if they wanted to remain on the right side
of the law?

As State College, Pa.,
lawyer Matt McClenahen put it in an email, “Calling [fortune telling]
‘for entertainment purposes only’ creates plausible deniability. It is
akin to an escort saying in an ad ‘any money exchanged is for my time
and companionship and not for sex.’ Here in PA, the police do not seem
at all interested in enforcing the law against charging money for
fortune telling, communications with the dead, etc., whether or not the
psychic uses the ‘for entertainment purposes only’ disclaimer. In fact, a
lot of cops do not even know it is illegal. I suspect a lot of the
psychics do not know it is illegal either.”

Here in Massachusetts, the
statutes make no implicit or explicit reference to the plausibility of
fortune telling. Instead, fortune tellers are granted free legal sailing
as long as they have obtained a license.

Telling fortunes without such a
license can cost up to $100.

Personally, I like
Pennsylvania’s willingness to suggest its skepticism with the use of the
word “entertainment:” Where fortune-telling is just a bit of fun, there
is less need to exercise the heavy hand of either credulity or the law.
But perhaps Massachusetts took a more cautious approach as the state
considered the potent fortune-tellers lobby.

Whatever the case, it
still strikes me as unreasonable to look skeptically at Madame Zuzu
while listening with credulous awe to the political debates or stump
speeches in the run-up to the 2016 presidential vote.

How much difference is
there between communing with the dead and foreseeing what will happen
“after I am president?” There is a difference between taking any of this
seriously and recognizing that it is “for entertainment purposes only.”

On the political front, consider trickle-down economics, the theory
that what benefits business interests and wealthy individuals must
trickle down and benefit the working man. To the best of my knowledge,
there is no supporting evidence that such a thesis is actually true.
Instead, as suggested by the International Monetary Fund, “[I]f the
income share of the top 20 percent (the rich) increases, then GDP growth
actually declines over the medium term, suggesting that the benefits do
not trickle down. In contrast, an increase in the income share of the
bottom 20 percent (the poor) is associated with higher GDP growth.”

How significantly
different is trickle-down economics from Madame Zuzu’s promise of a
tall, dark stranger in your future? The only economics involved in
either prognostication seems to be that you will end up paying for it.

Nor can the left rest on
its smug laurels. How different is Bernie Sanders’ “change we can
believe in” and Madame Zuzu’s channeling of Uncle Harry’s voice from the
far side of the grave? People can and have believed anything they like
and if the past is any indication, belief has not proved to be a
guarantor of solutions.

Where both
fortune-tellers and politicians are legally obliged to wear a “for
entertainment purposes only” button, solemnity can take a holiday and
people are less likely to get royally duped.

There are those who may
argue that Madame Zuzu is not a serious woman — that she is getting rich
based on the gullibility of others; that she has no wider purpose and
agenda; that she isn’t civic-minded; or that she is a fraud and civil
society deserves not to get defrauded.

Try rereading the above paragraph while replacing “Madame Zuzu” with a favorite politician.

Civil society deserves
not to be defrauded and yet, in the run-up to the 2016 presidential
elections, so much energy is given over to asking for the truth while
demanding to be lied to.

“No one can predict the future” is not just a figure of speech.

But it sure can be fun.

Adam Fisher lives in
Northampton. His column appears on the third Wednesday of the month. He
can be reached at genkakukigen@aol.com.

My name is Adam Fisher. I live in Northampton, Mass., U.S.A. I have a wife and three children. This is my blog and consists of almost-daily postings -- sometimes (older) about the Zen Buddhism I have admired and practiced for something short of 50 years; sometimes about other 'spiritual' matters; and (more recently) about whatever strikes my fancy. Except to the extent that it might help others to consider what sort of fool they might prefer not to be, this blog does not aim to help anyone. Writing is an old and diminishing habit. It's what I do. Once upon a time, I built a zendo/meditation hall in the backyard here and invited people to come. The zendo is still there and my Dharma name is still "Genkaku" ("original realization" or "original understanding") but these days the formality of meditation has drained. Black Moon Zendo is still a good zendo, but I am 77 in 2017 ... creaky and disinclined. I honor those who make courageous journeys, but am hoist by my own observation that "Just because you are indispensable to the universe does not mean the universe needs your help." Best wishes to all. I can be contacted at genkakukigen@aol.com